Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

ukcarper

Arklight wrote: »

You!!!8217;re misinterpreting the statistics by focusing on Labour as the only left wing party. 47% of graduates voted for Labour and the Lib Dems (a party whose sole policy at the moment is abandoning Brexit.)

40% voted for the Tories and UKIP.

Greens would be accounted for under the 13% of other. I can!!!8217;t think of any other right wing parties that would account for much of that group.

Right parties 40% left Parties left parties somewhere between 28% or 41%. Greens got 1.9% of vote in last GE.

tracey3596

If those saying that correlation between education and vote is wrong are from both sides of the Brexit camp, where is your "vested interest" Arklight?

Arklight

ukcarper wrote: »

Right parties 40% left Parties left parties somewhere between 28% or 41%. Greens got 1.9% of vote in last GE.

I suggest you revisit your maths. It’s gone rather Brexity.

Arklight

tracey3596 wrote: »

If those saying that correlation between education and vote is wrong are from both sides of the Brexit camp, where is your "vested interest" Arklight?

Respectfully Tracey, that means absolutely nothing and just suggests that you can’t think of a rebuttal.

ukcarper

Arklight wrote: »

I suggest you revisit your maths. It!!!8217;s gone rather Brexity.

Looks OK to me right 36+4=40, left 28+13=41, centre 19

tracey3596

Arklight wrote: »

Respectfully Tracey, that means absolutely nothing and just suggests that you can!!!8217;t think of a rebuttal.

Your reply shows that you have no answer.

May I return your politeness and suggest that you research what "rebuttal" means because I provided no rebuttal; instead I asked you a question.

To be clear: if (as you suggest) there is indeed a clear correlation (you might want to be certain of that word's definition too) between age, education and voting pattern in the UK's EU exit referendum then why do academics who are both for and against leaving the EU disagree and as such why have they formed a new group to provide evidence to show the lack of correlation?

Were it for example just one side suggesting this you might have a valid argument of there being at least a question of there being vested interest involved.
Since both pro-EU and pro-Brexit parties are involved, where is your alleged vested interest?

When (or rather "if") you answer you will in all likelihood find that you have rebutted your own argument.

Moby

tracey3596 wrote: »

Your reply shows that you have no answer.

May I return your politeness and suggest that you research what "rebuttal" means because I provided no rebuttal; instead I asked you a question.

To be clear: if (as you suggest) there is indeed a clear correlation (you might want to be certain of that word's definition too) between age, education and voting pattern in the UK's EU exit referendum then why do academics who are both for and against leaving the EU disagree and as such why have they formed a new group to provide evidence to show the lack of correlation?

Were it for example just one side suggesting this you might have a valid argument of there being at least a question of there being vested interest involved.
Since both pro-EU and pro-Brexit parties are involved, where is your alleged vested interest?

When (or rather "if") you answer you will in all likelihood find that you have rebutted your own argument.

Have a look at this Tracey:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034

The BBC has obtained a more localised breakdown of votes from nearly half of the local authorities which counted EU referendum ballots last June.

This information provides much greater depth and detail in explaining the pattern of how the UK voted. The key findings are:

The data confirms previous indications that local results were strongly associated with the educational attainment of voters - populations with lower qualifications were significantly more likely to vote Leave. (The data for this analysis comes from one in nine wards)
The level of education had a higher correlation with the voting pattern than any other major demographic measure from the census

It's pretty clear isn't it, why argue?

Incidentally your link is flawed:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexiteers-favoured-economic-study-shot-down-by-other-trade-economists-a7519596.html
Dr Graham Gudgin is Policy Exchange's Chief Economic Adviser. Policy Exchange is a right wing think tank.

tracey3596

Moby wrote: »

Have a look at this Tracey:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034



It's pretty clear isn't it, why argue?

Er, because it's not as clear as you seem to think it suggests?
That is why this group are now in existence, not because of me.
In which case and again politely, I suggest instead you vent your spleen at them Moby.


ETA
Did you read your link Moby?
What does the very first paragraph say?

A stinging academic critique of the Treasury’s economic impact analysis of Britain leaving the European Union, widely hailed by Brexiteers last week, has been sharply criticised by leading trade economists.

That's right, your link decries the decrying (:huh:) of the doom-and-gloom treasury analysis which has been debated before in this thread, NOT what I link to.

:rotfl:

The trouble is you see that in politics personal opinions are allowed; interpretations even - but not personal facts.

Moby

tracey3596 wrote: »

Er, because it's not as clear as you seem to think it suggests?
That is why this group are now in existence, not because of me.
In which case and again politely, I suggest instead you vent your spleen at them Moby.

I did read it.
Tracey 'Briefings For Brexit' is a pro Brexit campaign group:-
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/

This is not independent research. Why bother posting such a link?
Also it would be helpful if you put up links that are not behind a paywall.

I repeat for the umpteenth time anyone can google their socks off to look for 'evidence' to support their claim but as I say in my first post today not all evidence is equal and one thing does not simply cancel out another. Quality of evidence matters too!

For those looking for clarity on the issue watch Guy Verhofstadt on Andrew Marr this morning when you get a chance. He answers every question with refreshing candour and gives practical detail regarding the EU position on the upcoming issues. His statement of the reality of the situation is in total contrast to the lack of detail and bombastic nonsense from Johnson recently. The British people are being ill served by politicians who are not being straight with us about our future options!

tracey3596

Moby wrote: »

Tracey 'Briefings For Brexit' is a pro Brexit campaign group:-
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/

This is not independent research. Why bother posting such a link?
Also it would be helpful if you put up links that are not behind a paywall.

I repeat for the umpteenth time anyone can google their socks off to look for 'evidence' to support their claim but as I say in my first post today not all evidence is equal and one thing does not simply cancel out another. Quality of evidence matters too!

Oh please cease the unwarranted vitriol and instead concentrate upon reasoned debate.
I did not post that link but the original which was from The Telegraph.

It's also good enough for The Times:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brainy-brits-come-out-for-brexit-g2f23ddsf
Who say:

The group, which includes those who voted "remain" in 2016, is led by the historian Professor Robert Tombs and the economist Dr Graham Gudgin, both of Cambridge University. It also includes the former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, the Labour peer Lord Glasman and the Oxford law professor Dr Richard Ekins.

Is that good enough given the earlier remarks in this thread about what good journalism is in the UK?

I think really what you're trying to say is much more like "I don't like what you posted so I will try to ridicule either you, your post, the content or all three".
If so you risk looking foolish as with your comment regarding them being " a pro Brexit campaign group".

Show us anywhere describing them as pro-Brexit?
Then read their mission statement:
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/our-mission/

We call ourselves "Briefings for Brexit" because we aim to provide factual evidence and reasoned arguments. We believe that the people of Britain are fully capable of assessing information which is explained clearly and simply

Or maybe not judging by the reaction of some here.